Why are we trying to cover up that Semmelweis' involuntary commitment was an attempt to suppress his ideas? --Daniel C. Boyer 18:33 Jan 6, 2003 (UTC)
It seems all the last six or so changes have aimed at giving more credit to Semmelweis and telling more of his story, but if you know something additional about his involuntary confinement, please add it. I had always thought that frustration at bucking the medical establishment was the cause of his breakdown, but please correct me, because it makes a horrible and tragic story even more horrible, tragic, and instructive. Ortolan88 Sounds like a Conspiracy theoryMidgley 14:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Prof. Frederico Di Trocchiio covered Semmelweis quite extensively in his book "Il genio incompresso" see also his book "the big swindle". He writes that Semmelweis was already infected i.e. doomed when he came into psychiatric treatment. Frank A
Did that suggest a toxic psychosis? Midgley 14:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
Because it wasn't an attempt to 'cover up' his ideas.
It was to protect society from a man who was clearly insane by the values of that society.
Gentlemen could not be the source of infection as there was no concept of infection.
What was important was that the values of society, the idea that there were correct, proper people who were superior for reasons of birth and station and there were inferiors who did not matter.
That his pursuit of an idea which threatened the entire structure of civilization caused stress which brought a typically fragile because it was aware personality was not something any stabile society of the time could either imagine or tolerate.Mark Lincoln (talk) 04:11, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
@Mark: Could you please rewrite this so that it makes sense. I think you wrote it a bit too quickly